|
|
Re: What Are the Race Deniers Denying?
Bob Whitaker (bwhit@conterra.com)
Mon, 09 Dec 1996 17:21:20 -0500
Ron Kephart wrote:
>
> Bob Whitaker <bwhit@conterra.com> wrote:
> >
> > I have to keep reminding clones of their own party line. The line now
> > is that there were 200 million Africans transported, [...]
>
> My figure of 10 million Africans transported as slaves to the New
> World between abaout 1500 and 1850 or so comes from Bonham C.
> Richardson's The Caribbean in the Wider Context. I don't have the
> exact date or publisher on hand, but I will furnish them upon request.
>
> > The senior senator from Hawaii, an anti-white of Japanese descent,
> > stated that there were 50 million people in the present continental US
> > when the white man arrived and wiped them out.
> > Please do your own homework on your own line.
>
> I don't know where the Senator got his information; a much more
> realistic figure would be between 1 and 3 million. Ray Scupin
> (Anthropology: a Global Perspective 2/ed, p. 425) reports 1.2 to 2.6
> million; the source given for this is D. Ubelaker (1988) "North American
> Indian population size, A.D. 1500 to 1985", in the American Journal of
> Physical Anthropology 77:298-94. For the record, the population of
> native North Americans in 1985 was about 1.5 milion; this was up from
> around 250,000 or so at the time of Woundtherefore, how can "whitey"
> 1890).
>
> And, by the way, I don't have a "line." Believe me, I'm way too far
> left to be following any so-called "PC line".
>
> > Most of this is devoted to the same old point: whitey should be
> > destroyed because he deserves it.
>
> You are missing at least two points. Modern anthropology suggests
> that there is no such thing as "whitey", except as a social/cultural
> phantasy; same is true of "blacks", "asians", etc. So what are you
> worried about? You can't be destroyed if you don't exist!!
My problem with your so-called "color blindness" is that,
in terms of real world results, you are only interested in doing
it in white majority countries. You demand massive third world
immigration into EVERY white majority country, and ONLY into white
majority countries. You demand your so-called "race" mixing, which
is actually only *white* mixing, and you use public money for busing
and "low-cost"(black) housing to chase down any white escapees.
The best definition I know of *the white race* is that it is
your Politically Correct target. When your academic heroes are
"dealing
with the race problem", they target the white race perfectly.
Your so-called solution to the race problem is always only the
final solution to the white problem.
>
> Second point: it is not "whitey" that needs to be blamed; it is,
> instead, the racist and ethnocentric ideologies backing programs of
> action that have been carried out over the centuries in the name of
> religious doctrine (capitalism, christianity, whatever). True enough,
> western Europeans have tended to be the ones with the military and
> economic power to carry out these programs. But, I point out again,
> they are perfectly capable of carrying them out against each other
> (have you heard of Northern Ireland or "the former Yugoslavia"?). To
> find examples of non-Europeans behaving similarly, just check out
> Rwanda, or East Timor. People do not do evil because they have "white"
> or "black" or whatever genes; they do evil because they can be talked
> into believing that doing evil is the right thing to do.
>
> Ron Kephart
> University of North Florida
|